CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #50

[aust amateur slueth]

http://www.eeoc.gov/employees/mediation.cfm

Above is only one source, but I have not found one anywhere that says the mediation is part of the record. In fact, many mediators destroy their notes after concluding a case. Part of me wishes that EH and MR could really hear each other, but I have diminished hope on that. I do find it interesting that MR still thinks it would be a helpful thing to do. But maybe that's because he has never felt heard or even been given the chance to respond in a rational way without being interrupted and accused.

Can you please provide a link to proof that most mediators destroy their notes after concluding a case.

I doubt that mediators would destroy case notes, its more likely IMO that they would keep their records for quite a number of years, like any other professional.

bbm I recall Elaine doing those very things on Dr P - seriously, MR barely got to finish an answer throughout the entire time he was onstage with Elaine, and most of what he uttered was in response to Elaine's repeated accusations. Again, it is extraordinary how we all perceive things differently.

I said this earlier, but a trained mediator would not allow this to happen. Dr P did not in any way act as a mediator. Parties are spoken to privately when necessary, and together when possible - the mediator acts as a facilitator and intermediary when necessary. A trained mediator would avoid confrontation at all costs, and not even allow a whiff of it during a session. IMO Dr. P was an extension of the fb pages which have the intention of "calling out", accusing, interrogating, and pressuring MR into a desired response.

So this is in no way the purpose of mediation - ie to get an admission of guilt. I could see the value of mediation if it allowed MR to relate the events of his and Dylan's activities without interruption, or with genuine non-accusatory questions asked (though it's probably too late for that now). Having a reasonable conversation about their shared missing child should be possible. I have never seen the point of one parent continuing to negate or cast doubt on the veracity of every single thing the other claims to be true when they are no longer living together.

The context and tone of what each said needs to be considered, was it in relation to Dylans disappearance or not. If not what was the point of it, ie MRs snide comment calling EH 'Mrs Redwine and saying he used to know her', the way it was said was to intimidate EH. When he did his interview with MB he made a comment about EH 'hiding where she worked', IMO that came across as intimidation and veiled threat.

Its important to remember that the aired show was the result of much editing, therefore assuming that MR was cut off isn't wise, unless of course you were in the live audience. Our own verified insider was at the taping of the show, maybe she could tell us if he was cut off.

IIRC Dr Phil did speak with MR privately more than once

Dr Phil isn't a mediator he is a clinical psychologist who is a talk show host.

AS you said it is extraordinary how we all perceive things differently.


IMO Dr Phil and Jack Trimarco read MR very well


Theres some interesting reading at http://www.mediate.com/articles/vestala3.cfm

 

[TxLady2]

BBM :seeya: Hi TxLady2 Can you provide a link for that please?

AFAIK EH's statements have never wavered in her belief that MR was involved in and/or knows more about Dylan's disappearance.

TIA

Sorry, I don't save links to support opinions. If one has followed the case from the beginning, and seen and heard various media reports and interviews, one could see that in some statements she seems to be sure that Mark has done something to harm Dylan, and in others she has stated she really did not think he would hurt him.
I was not talking about who she believes is responsible, I meant her thoughts on what happened to Dylan, whether Mark hid him somewhere far away or killed him. I'm sure she is no different than most mothers with missing kids. You want to hang on to the hope that your child is alive but your imagination sends pictures to your mind of all kinds of things that could have happened.

 

[TxLady2]

Yes I feel him not passing that poly is keeping them from finding Dylan!


I firmly believe MR knows exactly where Dylan is.

Okay, thanks, but I can't see where failing the poly will tell them where Dylan is, if he doesn't know.
Too much time has passed, the benefits of taking one now would be minimal. Let's say he takes one and passes it. Is that going to change anyone's mind? I don't think so, many would just dismiss it and claim he figured out how to beat it.
JMO, but whether he passed or failed... that's not going to find Dylan. If he failed one, they can't beat a confession out of him. If he passes, then what? They'll start to look at other possibilities? That should have been done from the beginning.
We differ on our opinions, and that's okay. I just don't put that much faith in a polygraph, they're not proof of guilt or innocence, they're just a tool. Nothing more or less.

 

[SCHMAE]

My two cents... until Dylan comes homes and ER and MR have to resume custody/visitation/co parenting, I don't see what mediation would help.

 

[TxLady2]

Mediation is most likely the wrong word, IMO. Facilitator would probably be better. An intermediary that has flexibility to uncover what the issues are, rather than carrying the role of trying to resolve a known dispute.

Detached, unbiased, able to keep a conversation on track.

IMO - the use here would be to get them to collaborate on strategies to find Dylan - searches, public awareness, fundraising, etc.

And IMO the reason to do this is to get MR talking. If he's guilty he's not going to confess it IMO but he may accidentally drop information. If he's not guilty he may have more information to add to the searches.

All of this is IMO.

Thank you, I agree. Putting the two parties in separate rooms would not accomplish anything, IMO, since the purpose should be to get them talking to each other and working together to find their son.
Forgive me, but I have a picture in my mind of Mark sitting in one room, and Elaine in another room, and the mediator running back and forth relaying what one said to the other, back and forth, over and over. Kind of comical when you think about it.
I don't understand this inability from either one of them to be able to talk to each other. This is their son who is missing, they should be able to set aside their differences for once and work together to help find him, without all the negative emotions. Put the sarcasm and finger-pointing aside for an hour, and just focus on Dylan.

 

[rebeccaeee]

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/05/19/still-no-sign-of-dylan-redwine-after-6-months/

Mark says "because my ex-wife planted that seed … these search warrants were all issued based on the words coming out of her mouth." But ANY LE worth their badge would serve a search warrant at the place the missing person was last seen. If these were TRULY the only search warrants (and we don't know that) then they were in response to Dylan's last known location, not in response to Elaine's suspicions.

 

[Salem]

Hey everybody - looks like the search warrants have hit the airwaves. They are postable - but they must come from an acceptable source, not facebook.

A member may post them, or they can be taken from MSM. But not from facebook.

Sorry,

Salem

ETA: Alternatively - maybe we can review and approve the facebook page. If anyone knows who the Admins are in charge of the page, please send me a pm and we will review.

Thanks!

 

[Salem]

Why is everyone fighting and arguing about facebook? We have one approved page at this point. Please don't bring the arguing, defending, explaining and just plain bickering here.

It has nothing to do with anything. This is about Dylan - NOT the 500 facebook pages out there.

Salem

 

[Lordeebee]

I copied the warrants as jpg's to my computer but don't know how to upload them here, argghhh. So I guess someone who knows how to take snap shots and upload as a url??

 

[Emma Ems]

Hey everybody - looks like the search warrants have hit the airwaves. They are postable - but they must come from an acceptable source, not facebook.

A member may post them, or they can be taken from MSM. But not from facebook.

Sorry,

Salem

ETA: Alternatively - maybe we can review and approve the facebook page. If anyone knows who the Admins are in charge of the page, please send me a pm and we will review.

Thanks!

Sorry Salem, I didn't know how to upload them either so I did the only thing I knew to do. Post the link and if people wanted to see them, let them go look on their own. Sorry about that.

 

[Salem]

Okay everybody - I pulled the search warrants for now

I know we all very much want the information - but we also do not want to interfere in an active LE investigation. So... we are contacting LE about the docs and I am checking with Management about posting them here.

Please be patient until we get a ruling on this.

Thanks,

Salem

 

[azgrandma]

Okay everybody - I pulled the search warrants for now

I know we all very much want the information - but we also do not want to interfere in an active LE investigation. So... we are contacting LE about the docs and I am checking with Management about posting them here.

Please be patient until we get a ruling on this.

Thanks,

Salem

Thanks Salem, I would hate for a fb posting to go viral and potentially hamper an investigation. Has msm gotten these yet?

 

[RANCH]

Thanks Salem, I would hate for a fb posting to go viral and potentially hamper an investigation. Has msm gotten these yet?

What I want MSM to get is not only the search warrants but the "Affidavit for a Search Warrant" that was used to get the search warrants.

That affidavit would have the evidence supporting the probable cause used to get the search warrants approved by a judge. While it could be ambiguous it would certainly be interesting information.

 

[aust amateur slueth]

What I want MSM to get is not only the search warrants but the "Affidavit for a Search Warrant" that was used to get the search warrants.

That affidavit would have the evidence supporting the probable cause used to get the search warrants approved by a judge. While it could be ambiguous it would certainly be interesting information.

IMO that there was enough probable cause for a judge to issue search warrants is enough information for the public.

That they were released somewhere other than MSM is concerning, I have to wonder about that, IMO someone is trying to derail the investigation and I wonder what their motives are, they appear murky at the very least.

 

[Tennlyn]

What I want MSM to get is not only the search warrants but the "Affidavit for a Search Warrant" that was used to get the search warrants.

That affidavit would have the evidence supporting the probable cause used to get the search warrants approved by a judge. While it could be ambiguous it would certainly be interesting information.

nevermind

 

[cluciano63]

I do not believe it is difficult to obtain search warrants when a child is missing, for the last place he was said to be. And I do not think we will learn much from them. After all, they will not say what was found, correct? Only what type of items are being sought.

 

[dlc]

<modsnip>

Yet another bizarre incident. As I've noted before, this is the first case I've followed here. Does this kind of thing usually happen -- do random people/unofficial FB groups often gain access to case information and release it, or is it usually done via a FIA request/MSM and or LE?

I did a quick scan of the documents -- didn't have time for a thorough read, but I agree that endangering Dylan is one possibility. From what I saw, however, I don't think whoever released these is doing MR any favors either.

As old HST once said, "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."


JMO, etc.

 

[RANCH]

IMO that there was enough probable cause for a judge to issue search warrants is enough information for the public.

That they were released somewhere other than MSM is concerning, I have to wonder about that, IMO someone is trying to derail the investigation and I wonder what their motives are, they appear murky at the very least.

I'm the type of person who likes my government to work in the open as much as possible. While I can understand why LE doesn't like to release anything they don't have to, sometimes it's in the best interest of the public to know what they are doing.

That includes releasing information about how they obtain search warrants. If it's certain that releasing the information will hamper an investigation then fine, let the public know that's the case. If not, then let us know.

 

[Dee10]

Who would have access to a copy, LE, the court & MR anyone else? The MSM doesn't seem to have it that I could find.

 

[Salem]

Please stop arguing back and forth about the search warrants. The docs have been released. Whether or not they are posted here and discussed is a Management decision. When that decision is made, we will let you know.

Until then, please move on. It serves no purpose to keep arguing about them.

Thanks,

Salem